Advanced level (3.5+) - avoid playing step-in neutral stance forehands?

E

eah123

Hall of Fame
I normally hit with an open stance forehand and play at an NTRP 3.5 level. I generally avoid hitting neutral/closed stance forehand. The only time I do is as an approach shot, using the front-to-front hop.

Today, my wife (NTRP 3.0) asked me to help her work on her forehand. She uses almost 100% neutral stance forehand. I noticed that she has a tendency to keep her feet fixed and to arm the ball. So I worked on having her with forward weight transfer, which includes using bringing the right leg forward at the conclusion of the stroke.

After feeding a couple of baskets, she seemed to get it, so we played some forehand to forehand rallies. Instead of my regular open stance, I used the neutral stance. I really enjoyed how effortless it felt to use my body weight to provide power rather than trunk coiling/rotation.

Then we played practice games. I continued to hit neutral stance forehands during the practice games, but what I noticed was how much slower recovery felt after each shot. Sometimes, after hitting a ball in no-mans land, I got into trouble -feeling my weight going forward, I felt that I had to continue to net or get caught backing up.

I think that the right thing to do is to stick with open / semi-open stance as much as possible and to avoid neutral/closed stance forehands, except when used as a front-to-front hop approach shot.

These 2 videos from Jeff Salzenstein and Jan Metelka seem to support this notion, that neutral stance forehand results in slower recover by "a step".

Am I reading that right?
 
I hit mostly open stance FHs when hitting crosscourt or if I hit an inside-in FH from the middle of the court. But, if I‘m hitting DTL-FHs, aggressive FHs off short balls [DTL or CC), inside-out FHs or inside-in FHs from my BH corner, I tend to close my stance. Sometimes, I can hit short balls with an open stance if I don’t have to run forward too much and have a lot of time to set up.

If you are hitting from near a sideline and want to recover back to the middle of the baseline, recovery from an open stance is easier. But, if you are hitting an aggressive FH and coming further into the court expecting a short ball or if you want to approach the net, going forward should be easier with a more closed stance.

I think you need to learn both stances and I don’t think there are any advanced 4.5+ players who hit only one kind of stance. I wouldn’t make a strict guideline that one is better than the other - use whichever one fits the situation. Maybe if you play only on clay courts that are slow/high-bouncing, you might end up hitting mostly open FHs as you have more time to set up and you are likely not coming to net much. On the other hand, if you play doubles and come forward to net a lot, you had better learn to hit with a closed stance also.
 
Last edited:
I relish the shots where I have the time to take that extra step down into neutral. You can get that extra weight transfer and really unload on the ball. If the point is relatively neutral, I can usually gain a slight advantage with those shots.
 
First, you need to hit a good shot. Second, you need to recover. Whenever using neutral stance allows you to hit better shot, go for it.

Using semi-open stance you can also either pivot in place or step through. It depends on the ball and intention. Whenever you have more time, face a slower weaker and/or lower ball, you likely be more consistent and solid stepping through.

If you hit from NML with good balance and enough time to line up in neutral stance, you want to attack with good placement and proceed to the net. In point play. If you are off-balance, you better send a slow deep ball (topspin or slice) and have more time to recover.

First things first. Good shot before good recovery. Hit weak, and it’s irrelevant how well you recovered.
 
eah123 said:
I normally hit with an open stance forehand and play at an NTRP 3.5 level. I generally avoid hitting neutral/closed stance forehand. The only time I do is as an approach shot, using the front-to-front hop.

Today, my wife (NTRP 3.0) asked me to help her work on her forehand. She uses almost 100% neutral stance forehand. I noticed that she has a tendency to keep her feet fixed and to arm the ball. So I worked on having her with forward weight transfer, which includes using bringing the right leg forward at the conclusion of the stroke.

After feeding a couple of baskets, she seemed to get it, so we played some forehand to forehand rallies. Instead of my regular open stance, I used the neutral stance. I really enjoyed how effortless it felt to use my body weight to provide power rather than trunk coiling/rotation.

Then we played practice games. I continued to hit neutral stance forehands during the practice games, but what I noticed was how much slower recovery felt after each shot. Sometimes, after hitting a ball in no-mans land, I got into trouble -feeling my weight going forward, I felt that I had to continue to net or get caught backing up.

I think that the right thing to do is to stick with open / semi-open stance as much as possible and to avoid neutral/closed stance forehands, except when used as a front-to-front hop approach shot.

These 2 videos from Jeff Salzenstein and Jan Metelka seem to support this notion, that neutral stance forehand results in slower recover by "a step".

Am I reading that right?
Click to expand...
Nope. Misguided. Strongly disagree with your premise. And I do not believe that Jeff Salzenstein would agree with your take on what he promotes either. Patrick Mouratoglou's videos and pro clients feature a very aggressive use of neutral stance on both the Fh & Bh side.

Rec players (novice, int & adv) would do well to hit a strong majority of their Fh strokes with a good mix of neutral & semi-open stances. Fully open and significantly closed stances should be employed to a much lesser degree.

Prolific use of the open stance, especially the fully open stance, can eventually take its toll on your dominant hip. We started seeing strong evidence of this with Gustavo Kuerten, prolific open-stancer, some 2 decades ago. Even with 2 hip surgeries, Gustavo was forced to retire even tho he was still capable of playing at a very high level.

Lleyton Hewitt was another proponent of hitting most of his Fh strokes with an open stance, a high percentage of them were fully open stances. LH also endured two hip surgeries. But the younger Lleyton was a bit more fortunate then Gustavo -- he was able to continue his career after the hip surgeries.

Since those 2 guys, there have been quite a few other elite/pro players who have developed right hip problems (if they were right handed) in the past 2 decades. Note that most modern pro players perform a considerable amount of training / conditioning to fortify their hips in order to minimize hip injuries.

The problem with many rec players & other non-elite tennis players is that they will hit a high % of their ground strokes with open stances but not put in a sufficient gym time to bulletproof their hips to avoid inevitable hip injuries. If you are lucky, you might get away with hitting a majority of your Fh strokes with a decade or more before the overuse stress to the hip becomes an issue

Hip Injuries and the Open Stance Forehand

005 is shaping up to be a fascinating, blockbuster year on the world pro tour. In this preview Tennisplayer Tour Editor A.J.Chabria assessing the state of the game and the games of the players, from the top stars like Roger Federer and Serena Williams to the young players, many of them not...
www.tennisplayer.net
 
Last edited:
@eah123

Again, look at the numerous short YT videos from Patrick Mouratoglou working with high level players. Many of them feature players hitting aggressive neutral stance Fh & Bh strokes. Note that, for shots out wide, where recovery time is greater, the neutral stance is not often employed. There are times where a closed stance is utilized by top players but, on wider shots, an open stance is more likely.

But there is still a high percentage of shots where a neutral stance might be optimal (and easier on the body). In the video below, Jeff Salzenstein indicate where neutral, closed and open stances might be utilized. In this video he does not really make a distinction between neutral and closed stances but you can see situations where he uses each of these. He does not advocate hitting most of your Fh shots with open stances as you claim

 
SystemicAnomaly said:
Nope. Misguided. Strongly disagree with your premise. And I do not believe that Jeff Salzenstein would agree with your take on what he promotes either. Patrick Mouratoglou's videos and pro clients feature a very aggressive use of neutral stance on both the Fh & Bh side.

Rec players (novice, int & adv) would do well to hit a strong majority of their Fh strokes with a good mix of neutral & semi-open stances. Fully open and significantly closed stances should be employed to a much lesser degree.

Prolific use of the open stance, especially the fully open stance, can eventually take its toll on your dominant hip. We started seeing strong evidence of this with Gustavo Kuerten, prolific open-stancer, some 2 decades ago. Even with 2 hip surgeries, Gustavo was forced to retire even tho he was still capable of playing at a very high level.

Lleyton Hewitt was another proponent of hitting most of his Fh strokes with an open stance, a high percentage of them were fully open stances. LH also endured two hip surgeries. But the younger Lleyton was a bit more fortunate then Gustavo -- he was able to continue his career after the hip surgeries.

Since those 2 guys, there have been quite a few other elite/pro players who have developed right hip problems (if they were right handed) in the past 2 decades. Note that most modern pro players perform a considerable amount of training / conditioning to fortify their hips in order to minimize hip injuries.

The problem with many rec players & other non-elite tennis players is that they will hit a high % of their ground strokes with open stances but not put in a sufficient gym time to bulletproof their hips to avoid inevitable hip injuries. If you are lucky, you might get away with hitting a majority of your Fh strokes with a decade or more before the overuse stress to the hip becomes an issue

Hip Injuries and the Open Stance Forehand

005 is shaping up to be a fascinating, blockbuster year on the world pro tour. In this preview Tennisplayer Tour Editor A.J.Chabria assessing the state of the game and the games of the players, from the top stars like Roger Federer and Serena Williams to the young players, many of them not...
www.tennisplayer.net
Click to expand...

Fortunately not an issue for rec players.

J
 
@eah123

Some years back, I had come across two books on sports injuries that indicated that some / many implementations of open stance Fh strokes can put some added stress on the dominant shoulder (as well as on the dominant hip). I can try to dig up that information again if the case concerning overuse hip injury does not get thru to you
 
I found 2 interesting research articles on relationship between open stance forehand and injury.

The first study looked at attacking OS, defensive OS and attacking neutral stance. They only found a significant difference in forces and extreme joint angles between DOS and both AOS and ANS. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7734511/

There is a big difference in the AOS and DOS technique - I’m not athletic enough to do DOS - it looks like this is the technique that the pros use to get a ball really out wide.

The second study looked at the effects of open stance vs neutral stance FH on upper extremity. I was surprised that open stance actually results in significantly lower racquet head speed at contact, and neutral stance forehand results in significantly increased force on the shoulder and wrist. Unfortunately , I couldn’t access the full article without paying. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12801214/

My conclusion is that the OS FH as played by most rec players is the AOS and most likely does not pose an increased risk of hip injury. The neutral stance forehand is probably more “powerful” due to increased racquet head speed, but does pose increased risk of shoulder and wrist injury as well.

OK, flame on!
 
Last edited:
The biggest advantage of moving forward during the shot, particularly against weaker balls with higher vertical/horizontal speed ratiois improved ability to time and adjust to the ball. Hitting while staying in place and pulling across requires more precise ball judgement, adjustment s d timing.

Meanwhile, receiving a penetrating ball, one uses open stance to have more time and space to execute the shot. Meanwhile, the ball approaches in more linear, horizontal trajectory, making swing alignment less tricky.
 
I have seen so many rec players ruined with an always open stance mindset. They completely lose situational awareness and positioning, and really lose recovery footwork by always opening up. If you watch you can see how much it breaks up natural flow of movement and strokes, or at least it does to me.
 
eah123 said:
My conclusion is that the OS FH as played by most rec players is the AOS and most likely does not pose an increased risk of hip injury. The neutral stance forehand is probably more “powerful” due to increased racquet head speed, but does pose increased risk of shoulder and wrist injury as well.

OK, flame on!
Click to expand...
And yet many non-pro tennis players, in their 50s & 60s, have developed hip and shoulder issues on their dominant side. For those who started at a very young age and have been using primarily OS, these injuries can even hit in the 30s & 40s. These types of injuries appear to be more common in the past 2-3 decades than they were in the neutral / closed stance era.

Instead of trying to rationalize a predominantly OS philosophy, how about taking preventative measures now so that you are not dealing with these issues in the year, 2035 (or sooner)? One is to employ more variety in your game -- with neutral & semi-OS. The other is to employ more physical conditioning in your regimen -- like monster walks, thrower's ten and the other recommendations provided in the TennisPlayer.net article

Also, follow the advice of Jeff Salzenstein & Patrick M with regards to neutral stances
 
SystemicAnomaly said:
And yet many non-pro tennis players, in their 50s & 60s, have developed hip and shoulder issues on their dominant side. For those who started at a very young age and have been using primarily OS, these injuries can even hit in the 30s & 40s. These types of injuries appear to be more common in the past 2-3 decades than they were in the neutral / closed stance era.

Instead of trying to rationalize a predominantly OS philosophy, how about taking preventative measures now so that you are not dealing with these issues in the year, 2035 (or sooner)? One is to employ more variety in your game -- with neutral & semi-OS. The other is to employ more physical conditioning in your regimen -- like monster walks, thrower's ten and the other recommendations provided in the TennisPlayer.net article

Also, follow the advice of Jeff Salzenstein & Patrick M with regards to neutral stances
Click to expand...
That's why exercise and fitness it is important, doing stretches regularly (not just before hitting) is super important. Wearing appropriate gears/bands/braces to protect tendoms, wrists, etc is also important.

Open stances or neutral stances it doesn't matter for the OP since OP is probably still not at the level where this will be a big concern yet I think.
 
pencilcheck said:
That's why exercise and fitness it is important, doing stretches regularly (not just before hitting) is super important. Wearing appropriate gears/bands/braces to protect tendoms, wrists, etc is also important.

Open stances or neutral stances it doesn't matter for the OP since OP is probably still not at the level where this will be a big concern yet I think.
Click to expand...
Actually, that stretching that many amateurs are doing just prior to tennis is often the wrong type. Many are still performing static stretches rather than dynamic stretching. Dynamic stretches are held for less than 0.5 seconds or not at all -- alternating lunges, walking lunges, arm circles, leg swings, torso rotations, shadow swinging, footwork patterns, etc

Static stretches (held stretches) our best done after tennis or other workouts. Or they can be performed at home before heading out to the courts -- preferably an our prior to hitting (or 30+ mins at the very least). No yoga immediately prior to playing tennis either. Many have told me that it takes them an hour or two to recover from yoga before they can get out to the courts to play

It sounds like the OP might be a high intermediate player. Players, at that level, have often already established crystallized habits and mindsets. Some can easily adapt / change once those patterns are set. Many cannot. Not too soon for the OP to consider adding a variety to his game and pay some attention to conditioning -- especially for the hips & shoulders.

Ditto for his wife
 
Last edited:
SystemicAnomaly said:
Actually, that stretching that many amateurs are doing is often the wrong type. Many are still performing static stretches rather than dynamic stretching. Dynamic stretches are held for less than 0.5 seconds or not at all -- alternating lunges, walking lunges, arm circles, leg swings, torso rotations, shadow swinging, footwork patterns, etc

Static stretches (held stretches) our best done after tennis or other workouts. Or they can be performed at home before heading out to the courts -- preferably an our prior to hitting (or 30+ mins at the very least). No yoga immediately prior to playing tennis either. Many have told me that it takes them an hour or two to recover from yoga before they can get out to the courts to play

It sounds like the OP might be a high intermediate player. Players, at that level, have often already established crystallized habits and mindsets. Some can easily adapt / change once those patterns are set. Many cannot. Not too soon for the OP to consider adding a variety to his game and pay some attention to conditioning -- especially for the hips & shoulders. Ditto for his wife
Click to expand...
Static stretching is also very important in my opinion, I would say it is best to do it regularly but esp before hitting. A better term for it would be "deep" stretching (not yoga of course). You don't just hold it longer, you do it more in depth and stretch further then hold. This pushes the limit of your flexibility and really make sure when you are moving, you will be more prepraed for those movements.

Dynamic stretching is often misused, as most of them will start cheat themselves and move only small muscles and never go deeper and then when they actually start hitting, they get into that position and injure themselves.
 
pencilcheck said:
Static stretching is also very important in my opinion, I would say it is best to do it regularly but esp before hitting. A better term for it would be "deep" stretching (not yoga of course). You don't just hold it longer, you do it more in depth and stretch further then hold. This pushes the limit of your flexibility and really make sure when you are moving, you will be more prepraed for those movements.

Dynamic stretching is often misused, as most of them will start cheat themselves and move only small muscles and never go deeper and then when they actually start hitting, they get into that position and injure themselves.
Click to expand...
Static stretching can be important. But timing is even more important. Numerous studies have been done on stretching in the past 2-3 decades. Studies indicate static stretches just prior to sports or physical exercise do not prevent injuries. In some cases, they promote it. This is one reason why you no longer see most professional teams or individual athletes performing static stretches just prior to competition

A number of these studies also show that static stretching will reduce muscle performance -- muscle speed & muscle strength. This effect will often last for an hour -- more in some cases (like intense yoga) or less for light stretching.

I started hearing about the fallacy of our stretching routines back in the early 1990s -- in high level volleyball classes in which I participated. Numerous studies have revealed even more since then

Do your static stretches at home -- before heading to the court. Or after tennis. Dynamic stretching should not be confused with ballistic stretching or PNF stretching
 
Take a close look at the type of stretches professional tennis players are doing before their matches. Pretty much all of it is done with movement. They are still doing various types of dynamic stretches during the coin toss phase, just prior to their pre-match warm-up
 
Last edited:
I found this excellent video from OTI that goes over how/when to hit open stance vs. neutral stance FH. It also shows the proper footwork for recovering to baseline after hitting neutral stance.

I'm definitely going to work on combining the 2 using the drill that's shown in the video.

 
eah123 said:
I found this excellent video from OTI that goes over how/when to hit open stance vs. neutral stance FH. It also shows the proper footwork for recovering to baseline after hitting neutral stance.

I'm definitely going to work on combining the 2 using the drill that's shown in the video.

Click to expand...
The Jeff S video I provided also shows which situations neutral, closed and open stances on the Fh are employed. These are general guidelines as suggested by Jeff. They may differ a bit from what OTI or some other coach may suggest
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Open/neutral stance inside out forehand
Replies
5
Views
3K
SuperDuy
S
louis netman
HELP Transforming Closed (beyond Neutral) Stance FH Habit...
Replies
10
Views
644
nyta2
N
D
semi-open stance problems
Replies
3
Views
838
Sliceboy2
S
cys19
Open stance vs closed stance
Replies
11
Views
2K
Deleted member 13755
D
Bender
When practising, should you try to hit with a neutral stance whenever possible?
Replies
4
Views
568
J011yroger
J011yroger
Back
Top